Pets on flights can be classified as baggage, the European court of justice has ruled, meaning airlines are not required to pay higher compensation if the animal is lost.
The ECJ, Europe’s highest court, was asked to intervene after a dog was lost during a journey from Buenos Aires to Barcelona, triggering a claim for losses from the owner.
The court heard that the passenger and her mother checked into the flight with the dog, Mona, which was put in a special pet crate. However, the dog escaped while it was being taken to the plane and was never recovered, prompting a claim of €5,000 (£4,340) for “non-material damage” by the passenger, and a six-year court case.
The airline involved, Iberia, accepted liability for the loss of the pet but not the size of the claim, arguing it exceeded the liability for lost luggage without any special declarations as to the crate’s contents.
The court said the passenger, a girl named Felicísima in documents, and her mother made no special declarations in relation to the baggage when checking it in and could not therefore make a claim for these losses.
Pets are not often seen on European flights but are more common on transatlantic flights, with small dogs allowed in the cabin. Larger dogs, like the one at the centre of this lawsuit, are required to be placed in the hold by airlines that allow pet travel.
“The dog got out of the carrier, started running near the plane and could not be recovered,” the ECJ papers say.
At an earlier court hearing in Spain, it was heard that, despite an intense campaign on social media launched by Felicísima, the dog has never been recovered.
Felicísima said she would never give up her search, saying it was “a disgrace” if someone in Buenos Aires had taken her dog and claimed it as their own. “Who has Mona, knowing that she is ours; knowing the pain we have felt?” she asked in a Facebook post.The case sets a precedent for anyone travelling with pets who does not make a special declaration about the contents of the pet crate and the animal is lost.
The girl’s lawyer in Madrid, Carlos Villa Corta, said he disagreed with the arguments made in the Luxembourg court, claiming “no airline in the world will accept a special declaration of value” for a pet in the hold.
“I believe that a great opportunity has been missed to continue raising awareness of the rights of animals and the people who care for them. Ultimately, the ECJ considers that pets do not deserve special or enhanced legal protection compared to a simple suitcase.”
The judge in the Spanish court referred the case to the ECJ to examine a matter of law at the heart of the case: whether the concept of baggage applied to the dog in the crate under the Montréal convention, an international treaty setting out rules for airlines’ liability for losses ranging from death to delays and lost cargo or baggage.
The ECJ said: “The Montréal convention clearly refers to persons and baggage. It therefore follows from the clear wording of this provision that the term ‘persons’ covers ‘passengers’, such that a pet cannot be considered a ‘passenger’.
“It must therefore be considered that, for the purposes of air transport, a pet falls within the concept of ‘baggage’ and compensation for damage resulting from its loss during such transport is subject to the liability regime laid down for baggage.”
The judgment also noted that the liability of an airline for lost baggage could be determined by any special declaration on contents – which did not happen in this case.
According to Spanish reports on the original case, the court ruled that because a special declaration about the animal was not made before the flight, Felicísima was entitled to only €1,578.82.
In a statement, the ECJ said: “The fact that the protection of animal welfare is an objective of general interest recognised by the European Union does not prevent animals from being transported as ‘baggage’ and from being regarded as such for the purposes of the liability resulting from the loss of an animal.”
